The Demon of Reason

Explore the circular reasoning fallacy, which occurs when the end of an argument comes back to the start without having proven itself. -- It’s 1990. A prospective student has filed a complaint about Virginia Military institute’s admissions policy that excludes women. The state argues that VMI’s single sex education is an “important governmental objective” and that the exclusion of women from VMI is essential to that objective. Can you spot the problem with this argument? Elizabeth Cox explores the circular reasoning fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by TOGETHER. Support Our Non-Profit Mission ---------------------------------------------- Support us on Patreon: Check out our merch: ---------------------------------------------- Connect With Us ---------------------------------------------- Sign up for our newsletter: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: ---------------------------------------------- Keep Learning ------------------------------------

Explore the circular reasoning fallacy, which occurs when the end of an argument comes back to the start without having proven itself. -- It’s 1990. A prospective student has filed a complaint about Virginia Military institute’s admissions policy that excludes women. The state argues that VMI’s single sex education is an “important governmental objective” and that the exclusion of women from VMI is essential to that objective. Can you spot the problem with this argument? Elizabeth Cox explores the circular reasoning fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by TOGETHER. Support Our Non-Profit Mission ---------------------------------------------- Support us on Patreon: Check out our merch: ---------------------------------------------- Connect With Us ---------------------------------------------- Sign up for our newsletter: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: ---------------------------------------------- Keep Learning ------------------------------------

Explore the middle ground fallacy, which assumes that the truth is always a compromise between two extreme opposing positions. -- It’s 1819. The US is preparing to make Missouri and Maine new states. One representative insists that slavery shouldn’t be allowed in any new state. Another believes it should be a state’s right to choose. A compromise is proposed: slavery will be allowed in Missouri and prohibited in Maine. Can you spot the problem with this compromise? Elizabeth Cox explores the middle ground fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by TOGETHER. Support Our Non-Profit Mission ---------------------------------------------- Support us on Patreon: Check out our merch: ---------------------------------------------- Connect With Us ---------------------------------------------- Sign up for our newsletter: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: ---------------------------------------------- Keep Learning ----------------------------------------------

Explore the middle ground fallacy, which assumes that the truth is always a compromise between two extreme opposing positions. -- It’s 1819. The US is preparing to make Missouri and Maine new states. One representative insists that slavery shouldn’t be allowed in any new state. Another believes it should be a state’s right to choose. A compromise is proposed: slavery will be allowed in Missouri and prohibited in Maine. Can you spot the problem with this compromise? Elizabeth Cox explores the middle ground fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by TOGETHER. Support Our Non-Profit Mission ---------------------------------------------- Support us on Patreon: Check out our merch: ---------------------------------------------- Connect With Us ---------------------------------------------- Sign up for our newsletter: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: ---------------------------------------------- Keep Learning ----------------------------------------------

Dig into the slippery slope fallacy, which assumes that one step will lead to a series of events that lead to an extreme— often bad— scenario. -- It’s 1954. Vietnamese nationalists are on the verge of securing an independent Vietnam under communist leader Ho Chi Minh. U.S. President Eisenhower claims that by virtue of the "falling domino principle," communist control of Vietnam would lead to the global spread of authoritarian communist regimes. Can you spot the problem with this argument? Elizabeth Cox explores the slippery slope fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by TOGETHER. Support Our Non-Profit Mission ---------------------------------------------- Support us on Patreon: Check out our merch: ---------------------------------------------- Connect With Us ---------------------------------------------- Sign up for our newsletter: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: ---------------------------------------------- Keep Learning ----------------------

Dig into the slippery slope fallacy, which assumes that one step will lead to a series of events that lead to an extreme— often bad— scenario. -- It’s 1954. Vietnamese nationalists are on the verge of securing an independent Vietnam under communist leader Ho Chi Minh. U.S. President Eisenhower claims that by virtue of the "falling domino principle," communist control of Vietnam would lead to the global spread of authoritarian communist regimes. Can you spot the problem with this argument? Elizabeth Cox explores the slippery slope fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by TOGETHER. Support Our Non-Profit Mission ---------------------------------------------- Support us on Patreon: Check out our merch: ---------------------------------------------- Connect With Us ---------------------------------------------- Sign up for our newsletter: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: ---------------------------------------------- Keep Learning ----------------------

Dig into the false analogy fallacy, which assumes that because two things share a characteristic, they must be alike in other respects. -- It’s 1997. The United States Senate has called a hearing about global warming. Some expert witnesses point out that past periods in Earth’s history were warmer than the 20th century. Because such variations existed long before humans, they claim the current trend is also the result of natural variation. Can you spot the problem with this argument? Elizabeth Cox explores the false analogy fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by TOGETHER. Support Our Non-Profit Mission ---------------------------------------------- Support us on Patreon: Check out our merch: ---------------------------------------------- Connect With Us ---------------------------------------------- Sign up for our newsletter: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: ---------------------------------------------- Keep Learning ----------------------------

Dig into the false analogy fallacy, which assumes that because two things share a characteristic, they must be alike in other respects. -- It’s 1997. The United States Senate has called a hearing about global warming. Some expert witnesses point out that past periods in Earth’s history were warmer than the 20th century. Because such variations existed long before humans, they claim the current trend is also the result of natural variation. Can you spot the problem with this argument? Elizabeth Cox explores the false analogy fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by TOGETHER. Support Our Non-Profit Mission ---------------------------------------------- Support us on Patreon: Check out our merch: ---------------------------------------------- Connect With Us ---------------------------------------------- Sign up for our newsletter: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: ---------------------------------------------- Keep Learning ----------------------------

Dig into the burden of proof fallacy, which assumes that something is true unless proven false and relies on arguments from ignorance. -- It’s 1950. Anti-communist sentiment in the United States is at an all-time high. Senator Joseph McCarthy claims he has a list of communists who are influencing government policy. He makes his first accusation without providing any legitimate evidence, yet the senate committee still schedules a hearing. Can you spot the problem with this hearing? Elizabeth Cox explores the burden of proof fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by Pazit Cahlon and Hector Herrera. Animator's website: Sign up for our newsletter: Support us on Patreon: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: View full lesson: Thank you so much to our patrons for your support! Without you this video would not be possible! Pavel Maksimov, Victoria Soler-Roig, Betsy Feathers, Samuel Barbas, Therapist Gus, Sai Krishna Koyoda, Elizabeth Parker, William Bravante, Ir

Dig into the burden of proof fallacy, which assumes that something is true unless proven false and relies on arguments from ignorance. -- It’s 1950. Anti-communist sentiment in the United States is at an all-time high. Senator Joseph McCarthy claims he has a list of communists who are influencing government policy. He makes his first accusation without providing any legitimate evidence, yet the senate committee still schedules a hearing. Can you spot the problem with this hearing? Elizabeth Cox explores the burden of proof fallacy. Lesson by Elizabeth Cox, directed by Pazit Cahlon and Hector Herrera. Animator's website: Sign up for our newsletter: Support us on Patreon: Follow us on Facebook: Find us on Twitter: Peep us on Instagram: View full lesson: Thank you so much to our patrons for your support! Without you this video would not be possible! Pavel Maksimov, Victoria Soler-Roig, Betsy Feathers, Samuel Barbas, Therapist Gus, Sai Krishna Koyoda, Elizabeth Parker, William Bravante, Ir